Tag Archives: Political

Deep State Blues (1/3)

I guess, in my own way, I’ve been aware of something odd about our government here in the United States of America,  I don’t mean to single the U.S. as somehow unique in this way, it is simply the only country with which I am familiar.  The perspective of those that think of the United States as some how exceptional and indispensable seem as though they have fallen into some kind of a trap that has effectively blinded them.  Throughout my few years at the university I had always had a sense that there was something more to the way we were ruled other than the obvious visible government.  You can use what ever term you like, Illuminati, Shadow Government, Deep State  or maybe the Lizard Banksters from Draco.  Many of us have always had that sense that there is something we are missing, not detecting, something obvious.

My Mother, whether she meant to or not, added to this sense, for her the thing that really tripped her trigger was the Kennedy assassination followed by the gulf of Ton kin incident.  For her father it was remember the Maine.  For me it was Iran Contra.  College and I had parted ways and I was out in the world working as a Grease Scraper and a Shit Shoveler.  I would not have minded either job with full time employment if I made enough for Rent, food and utilities.  That means no automobile and no medical and I didn’t have a television or a telephone so I was pretty far out of the loop.  No cable meant no C-span and no newspaper meant no regular coverage yet I still managed to pick up bits and pieces here and there.  Over the years I have stumbled back into the topic with fair regularity.  I would become familiar with the term Deep State some years later.  In this case I am referring to Peter Dale Scott and although I haven’t read his books I have listened to several lectures and interviews and have found myself perplexed.  What is the Deep State and what purpose does it serve?

Generally, when ever I hear some one speak of the Deep State it is always with respect to the elected Federal Government, bureaucratic aspects of said government, Intelligence Agencies with a focus on CIA and NSA and finally the Military Industrial Complex.  The purpose these agencies serve is always nefarious if not out right malevolent.  I feel that this is only a partial description and I need a better model if I want to get any kind of real use out of the concept.

There are a couple of criteria a social structure must meet before it can be considered a part of the Deep State.  Firstly it must fall into one of these categories:  Public Governance (Federal, State and some large cities or densely populated counties), Corporate Governance ( Corporations are anti democratic institutions, national or international in nature and bureaucratic),   Large religious organizations (national or international), Centers of Economic, Military, Spiritual, Legal or Cultural importance not previously mentioned, along with organized movements (Labor, Anti War, Civil Liberties, Human rights and other community organizations), and finally organized Crime (national or international).  The second Criteria is that these organizations need physical structures such as buildings, by laws, guidelines, legal paper work or mission statements and complex bureaucracies. It can be quickly noted that some institutions fulfill several elements of the first set of criteria for example the Federal Government is also a center of Military, Economic and Legal importance.  The larger and more complex these social structures appear is directly proportional to the age of the institution in question.  A Good example of this would be the Catholic Church which is a vast bureaucracy involving well over a billion people at some level in and organization that has interests in centers of Spiritual, Economic and cultural.influence.

The larger and largest of these entities has a public face.  This public face maybe an individual or a group of individuals who are known by name or this face could be something imagined, sort of a abstracted blank even including something as simple as a logo in which can be seen any given spectators particular view of this entity.  All things that we perceive in the world around us are always colored by our individual world view.  This public face, whether it belongs to a real person or some abstracted blank is a mental substitute for the organization or institution they/it represents.  The reality is that these various entities that have been previously mentioned are actually populated by hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands and in some cases hundreds of thousands individuals operating at various levels and in various capacities.  They are like a human body where the individual cells are replaced by individual people.  Each of these people have their own world view.  It can be said that there is a basic world view that the bulk of a stable culture largely hold in common though any given individual may shift to one side of the other as our world view is colored by our assumptions about the world and our role in it both as individuals as well as a company or a nation and it is also colored by our experiences.  With in these entities or institutions the various individuals at various levels align with each other along a  shared point of view and shared interests so that it could be said that there is a realm of internal politics that most of us are completely unaware of, this is just the beginning of understanding the deep state.

It is much easier to imagine an old forest with its tall trees both great and small.  Most of us live on the forest floor and our perception of these vast institutions is limited to the stretch of trunk that we can see.  If we tip our gaze skyward we can see the canopy where each tree occupies a space, a sphere of influence or interest, and that many trees overlap each other here or there, none-the-less our view is from the bottom and we cannot see the entirety of the canopy though we understand that it is there and sometimes can even see the interrelationships.  Beneath our feet are the roots of the various trees.  These roots are beyond our ability to sense, it is under our feet where these roots tangle and compete for resources.  This is the best way I can illustrate what I mean by the term Deep State.

I’ve been watching the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence investigation into the Russian Hack Ordeal.  Specifically the testimony of Attorney General Comey and Admiral Rogers director of NSA.  Its quite fascinating and if you are wide awake and have about four hours to burn you might want to check it out.  I find the language usage intriguing as there is lots of talk of National Security, Classified Documents, Protecting the American Citizenry along with a healthy dollop of conspiracy theories and righteous outrage.  Apparently Russia is our sworn enemy, just hates us and wants to destroy our Democracy, take away our freedom, if you will.  I would like to believe that we really are a free people but I am a bit confused.  How can a free person be charged with treason?  Just curious, not that it was talked about during the testimony, the thought just kept popping into my head.  I am I not free to believe as I see fit, to have the politics I choose, to work where I want, to form friendships and alliances as I see fit, I mean if I am truly free?  We throw that word around a lot, freedom, liberty, rights and just plain free.

I understand a criminal act like assault or murder, burglary or fraud for example but these are acts against another person.  By exercising my right to speak freely what person am I harming.  By smoking a cigarette or taking a shot of vodka or discussing politics with a friend from a foreign land what person am I harming?  Is it the other citizens or our fair country?  Could it be our own Government?  Is the Government here to protect us and our rights?  How can my exercising my rights be treason in any form?  Maybe it is because the government is also a person and the government has rights too.  We all already known this is true of The Corporation both for and not for profit as well as Religions.  There are a bunch of large powerful paper people out there among us mere mortals.  This brings me back to the hearing and the testimony concerning classified information or secrets.

As far as Director Comey (FBI) and Director Rogers (NSA) attitudes towards the Representatives present, they were friendly.  What was interesting was what they were prepared to answer such as how an individual could be unmasked, the protocols concerning such, and how many people each were aware of that had the ability to reveal the identity of a masked subject of surveillance and general questions about the processes.  It was the scope of such questions directed at Comey (FBI) that bled over into his knowledge of the Justice department of which he was uncertain.  From my point of view Justice falls under the auspices of the Attorney general so his (Comey’s) lack of knowledge wasn’t particularly surprising.  What I found most interesting was the non-answers or the diplomatic way of saying no comment.  Neither Comey (FBI) nor Rogers (NSA) would respond to hypothetical questions.  This quickly became abbreviated to “I won’t answer hypos.  The next “No Comment” was “I can’t comment on actual people,” or “Real names.”  I thought that was understandable, I could also understand the “I can’t comment on hypos as well.  Finally, the last “No Comment” Response was, and I am paraphrasing here, with respect to the release of classified documents through leaks, printed in newspapers particularly the New York Times was, “I can’t comment on the quality of classified leaks as to whether they are true or not because by doing such I would reveal which pieces of information were actually classified and that would violate my confidentiality oath.”  This was also understandable.  The “No Comment answers made a great deal of sense but that left me slightly unsettled.  In a time of Fake News and Alternative facts it quickly became apparent that I could not count on anyone with a security clearance to be honest with me or the public as it were about the quality of the information.  In essence, whether either director meant to of not, they said to me, us, in no uncertain terms that any time any expert with those clearances speaks they should be automatically suspected of bullshitting us.

How are we as American’s suppose to know what is true and what is not?  It gave me the strange sense that I, us or we were the enemy not Russia or China or Islamic Extremism.  This is an uncomfortable feeling.  Call me paranoid if you must.  How are we to know and trust our government if it is so easy for them to deny we concerned citizens the facts.  During a time when trust in our government is fading I think this is an important issue.

Opposite the Directors FBI and NSA was a surprising number of the membership of the House Permanent Select Committee on intelligence (HPSI) and they were far more interesting in their statements and questions.

The first Two that stand out to me are Representative Sewel and Representative Gowdy.  I have no idea which district either of the two represents and from my point of view it doesn’t matter.  Representative Sewel articulated clearly, point by point, each statement in the form of a question.  These were Rhetorical Questions which is a way of saying a statement that the listener is supposed to agree with or should be persuaded by.  In the case of Sewel these statements sounded like articles of impeachment.  I assume that she is a democrat but I don’t know if that is true.  I don’t feel the need to research it any further.  Both directors answered “No Comment,” To each statement.  She seemed young to me though again I could be mistaken, but her Rhetorical approach was impressive and I look forward to listening to her in the future as she gains experience and polish.  None the less Rep. Sewel was clearly partisan and obvious.

Representative Gowdy on the other hand took a more technical approach to the argument concentrating on the legal/bureaucratic side of the issue. lawyer to lawyer as it were.  He was in the form of and told in a mildly scolding tone insisting diplomatically that Comey resolve this issue with all haste.  The issue itself was becoming a problem and impeding the day to day running of the government.  I assume that Gowdy is a republican though I don’t know that to be true, not that it matters.  I am beginning to think that Gowdy is a politician to watch.  He is clever and tactically sophisticated.  First of all he took the Republican side or the argument but did so in such a way as to make it sound like the issue was something other than the administration.  That means that he supports the party and the President without attaching his person to the person of the President.  As any one can see President Trump is getting off to a pretty rocky start.

Finally there are two other representatives I feel that are worthy of mention, They are Mr. Turner and Dr. Wenstrup.  I surely hope I am spelling their names correctly.  Representative Turner opened his questions and slowly moved into the question of under what circumstances can a counter intelligence case be opened.  Translation:  When can the FBI or other intelligence agency begin secretly spying on me?

The exchange was frustrating for the Representative as Comey was unwilling to answer Hypos.  Representative Turner insisted that these weren’t hypos.  Comey gave in and answered a few and his responses weren’t the least bit alarming.  James Comey went along way to creating a feeling that the FBI, at least, still had some morals and ethics in the day to day running of their organization,  None-the-less Representative Turner slipped and poorly worded a question I think and his time ran out.  By the time he reclaimed some time he had lost his momentum.

It was shortly after this that Doctor Wenstrup picked up the same line of questioning and even gave an example of a meeting he had attended, where he met the Iraqi Ambassador.  Again there was some contention but I wouldn’t say it was heated, not even for pretend.  Eventually Comey came to the point in the Representatives questioning where he simply replied, “The FBI doesn’t give advisory opinions.”  I’m not sure that quote is exact.  Representative Wenstrup responded, “Then I’ll find out about it afterwards?”  again I am not sure that is a solid quote so consider it a paraphrase.

Comey Stated simply, “You’ll never find out about it.”  That I feel pretty sure is an actual quote, according to my notes.

Rep.  Wenstrup responded, “Unless I find out about it in the newspaper.”

And there it is, the issue that was pestering these two representatives enough that they felt the need to bring it up and/or they were sure that this bothered their constituents enough to discuss it.

This is an open Hearing, so everything here is for public consumption.  Every time you hear something like, “I don’t want to get into that here,” or “I’d like to save that for the closed session,” or “I’d like to wait for classified session before we get into that,” and so on that is a comment on content that isn’t for your ears or mine for that matter.  So what was the purpose of this thing and the other things like it?

Largely it gives the members of the committee an opportunity to speak directly to their constituents, the larger population who might be interested and to get their views into the congressional record so that when that big ball of shit rolls around, you know the one, we call them elections here, they can insist they did this or that, show the voters their speeches and other proof of their effort as a tool of persuasion.  What are they trying to tell the voters watching?  Where on the spectrum of the debate around President Trump and the issue of personal privacy as well as Security issues, they stand.  This message is for a particular group of people, those who are interested, generally, but not always, they are politically active, better than average in education, higher then average in income and in surprisingly influential positions especially once you get out of the big cities.

The real purpose of these inquiries was nicely stated when discussing the Russia Hack Ordeal and all though I don’t remember who said it I did write it down.  The purpose of the hack was “to create discord and division among the American People and to undermine our wonderful American Democracy.”  One member of the committee stated that the purpose was to put a cloud over the administration.  If you do decide to listen to this thing you will notice some distinct militaristic language.  The idea that the Russian Hack, if it happened, was an act of war.  This was in its own right quiet fascinating.  War is a powerful concept.  It is a word that evokes a strong range of emotions.  If you should watch this thing just keep in mind that what they are doing is Framing the Debate.

The Frame is the field in which the conversation can exist, it sets the terms the potential outcomes, who is good who is evil is both reductionist and dualistic in nature.  That is not to say this is some kind of a conspiracy, that the committee sat down in a smoke filled room(?)  or maybe at an organic Juice bar (?) and figured all this shit out, scripted the whole deal.  This arises from the individual members interests, one of which will be the 2018 election.  Regardless of their party the interests between one representative and another aren’t really that different.  There are some noteworthy exceptions but they are far and few between and don’t have much hope for a stellar career in politics.  For the most part the belt way people swim in the same water, breathe the same air eat from the same supply of food.  Believe me when I say they know what their interests are, do you?”

The purpose pf the Frame is to limit the debate, sort of like the climate debate frame.  You either believe that CO2 produced by humanity causes global warming or you are a climate change denier.  There is no real middle ground and no room for debate beyond those previous agreed conclusions.

In the Case of the Russian Hack Ordeal the frame is that Trump won because of outside interference not because of a change in the voting habits of the citizenry.  If this particular Frame takes then you are either a patriotic American who Believes that Trump won the election with the Help of an  enemy nation or you are a Russian Sympathizer and again there will be no middle ground.  This is the kind of frame that serves as a get out of jail free card for both houses of congress if the Frame takes and that remains to be seen.

Of course, it goes with out sating that I very well could be completely full of shit.  If someone were to accuse me of such I would be forced to admit no contest.

In any case have a better than average day.

Human Inspired Catastrophe Outlook

Region:  Global

Date(s) :  Tuesday June 13th to Wednesday September 13th, 2017

Deck:  Hermetic Tarot

Cards Drawn:  6 of Pentacles (inverse), The Hierophant (V major Arcana, inverse) and 8 of Pentacles.

Outlook for July 13 through September 13:

I know, what do I think I’m doing, But what can I do?  War, war and more war, the ever perennial world war III has started again.  Then of course there is the coming economic crash, collapse imminent, any day now, really!  I spend almost no time watching the traditional media institutions in the United States so maybe it just some of the weirder stuff I have fallen into the habit of viewing.  I have no idea how many of our fair citizen’s watch this stuff but I ma driven to consult the cards and see what they tell me.

Having little idea how to proceed I simply pulled three cards and they are above.

First a quick review,  There are three regions that are of interest to me.  Firstly is Eastern Europe, primarily the Baltic’s and Ukraine.  Secondarily the immigration issue and how it appears to be dealt with by countries like Poland, the Check Republic and Romania or is it Hungry? It seems to me that these countries are being unfairly singled out.  This is one of the reasons why the Russian Hack is so important to the congress.  It forces our attention to this region.  The Second Region lays between Egypt and Somalia to the south, Saudi Arabia Yemen and the gulf region front and center and Turkey and Iran to the north.  This one is more difficult for me to grasp being that the United States appears to have the bulk of the region peppered with Military bases.  Third and final is the south China sea.  Are you hearing much about this right now.  I picked up a story either on Algazeera or French 24 last night (Eastern Standard Time) about the Philippines recently joined a growing group of countries that are ending diplomatic relations with Taiwan.  France and Qatar might cause more than a shadow of a doubt about the veracity of the statement and there was no hard number given.

What do my Cards tell me?

World war 3 with biologic and Nukes abounding?  No.

Increased weapon sales? An attempt to put upward pressure in the oil market?  Trying to isolate Iran?  Yes to all three.  Chance of a scuffle, some blood shed, yes, escalating?  NO.   Not through the period of this reading.

Remember the Pentacles or Coins, a symbol concerned with the material and that includes wealth.

What about Eastern Europe?  No, neither the United States, at this time nor Russia want war, but the Rhetoric suits both administrations as the struggle to overcome growing electoral instability.  Watch for growing use of jingoistic language.  But I would expect the possibility of terror being quiet high for the the three month period ahead.  If you are planning to travel to the region I would make new plans.

What about China and the South China Sea?  Unless President Trump and Mad Dog Mike Mattis (Sp?) have some kind of a dumb ass attack, The cards say No.  Not profitable at this time.  It is possible that an incident could take place but it will be settled quickly and with little violence.

As far as the economy goes, The hierophant indicates an element of control form the top but that element of control can’t stop volatility from growing, what they can do is stop a slide once it starts by simple re positioning.  The will be bumps and scares but no collapse through the three month period, but it is a good time to reappraise any investments you might have.  There is a huge amount of leverage in both the bond market and the stock market,  Remember, fear traditionally sells.  It can provoke spending.  The problem right now is dwindling consumer confidence as well as diminished real capital in the hands of the average citizen as reflected in the current oil price.  Also expect the fed to raises rate at least one time this summer by 15 to 25 basis points.  This is an attempt to prepare if the situation worsens this winter.

Stay cool and have a better than average day.

The Internet Tarot Weather Dude’s Alien (E.T) Invasion Forecast

This sounded like a good idea when it was suggested to me, but, I have no idea how to implement it.  How can I pull a couple of cards or several cards and make sense of them in this context.  It’s kind of screwing with my head just a little.  Really I am spit balling here… I mean is Alien invasion even possible in the first case?  I have no real idea but I like to think of myself as an optimist and that anything is possible.  Then, of course there is probable.  Probability is largely based on expectation whether that expectation is logical, philosophical, mathematical or experiential.  In the end it is our past experiences (whether real or imagined) that shape or expectations of the future.  The view of possibilities 600 years ago are worlds different than our view of possibilities today so in the broadest sense of wide eyed credulity I guess it is possible.  None of that really matters any way as this is more of an experiment.  Just a test of creativity and problem solving so lets give it a whirl.

Date(s):  Monday June 5 through Sunday night July 2, 2017.

Deck:  Hermetic

Cards Drawn:  9 of Pentacles (disks or coins, inverse) and The Chariot (7 Major Arcana or Trumps)

Invasion Forecast:  No chance.  But with the nine of pentacles a most material plane monetary influence, or other base interests and the Chariot which stands as a vehicle for another cause expect the chatter on various websites, radio, you tube or even Television (I know, right?) to capitalize on rising east/west tensions by creating a lot more chatter on the topics of The Illuminati/NWO, Alien agenda, luciferian agenda and any other notion of foreign gods conspiracies and strange beings/Giants as a move to profit off of rising fears.  Take everything with a large grain of salt and try and have a good time.

As always, have a better than average day

The Trump Revolution?

I hesitate to use the word Revolution under most circumstances simply because of it mechanistic implications.  For example, if you mark a single tooth of a gear, like on a bicycle, let’s say, with a bit of bright yellow paint.  The gear has made one revolution when that bright yellow mark returns to its starting position.  This is what I mean when I use the term Mechanistic Implications.  In this context, nothing really changes after a revolution other than the names of the members of the ruling class and I believe there is some truth to this when we even just glance at the Trump administration.  On the other hand re could mean revolution as in the idea of re-evolving or re-imagining or world, human society and how it behaves or functions.  What’s weird to me about this is that I can hear both points of view represented in the two sides of the Trump Debate.   For those who believe he is some kind of a Fascist you should try and keep in mind that Corporations seriously usurped state power back in the late 90s and they had been working in that direction since before the Kennedy assassination.  I know how crazy this sounds and I need to state again for the record that I am a paranoid Schizophrenic or Schizoaffective depending on what decade and which of my various doctors you ask.  I know how crazy it sounds to me too.  I’ve been watching and mostly thinking about what I’ve been seeing and I just what to try to make it clear.

The big question is how did this guy get elected?

I’d like to brag and say that I knew he would be elected before super Tuesday but I suffered an intense fit of malaise and found myself occupied and mystified by the spectacle.  It doesn’t matter as I didn’t post on this then, but what is important is that it was my wife Meta who taught me the trick years ago.  It is nothing more then  a simple analyses of the media coverage including, now, the internet.  Whose face do you see the most often, whose voice do you hear the most often, how much live coverage does a candidate get and how many times is said candidate quoted.  This was true in the eighties for  the same reason that it is today but I fear I am about to derail my train of thought.

Did the Russian’s do it?  The Russian’s could be in serious trouble with in the next year or two as they may not be able to met their pension and subsidy obligations (Caspian Report YouTube) so I am unsure how many resources they can spare.  To be as Honest as I can be I believe that it would be in Russia’s interest to have a friendly administration so I don’t think the idea is that far fetched.  But before we start ginning up Anti-Russian sentiment we might want to look closer to home.

The first place to look would be the media itself, whether internet or cable/corporate (MSM) because it surely seemed to me, remember, I’m crazy, that Donald J. Trump was being pushed by them.  I just couldn’t shake the feeling.  Why didn’t they split the coverage evenly between the Republicans (Trump) and Clinton?  The argument was that the people running the media, line producers or what ever just couldn’t resist those add dollars.  It was Trump Mania, the money was too good.  Let me get this straight, management, CEO, COO, CFO, just haven’t noticed over the past three decades that the person they cover the most wins.  Is that what passes for genius these days?  It was so fucking obvious that the Weekly World News predicted both Clinton I and Baby Bush.  Why is it that whenever anything crazy happens that the defense on behalf of the corporate perpetrators is always, we were too stupid to know any better?  It well could have been that the talking heads on the screen and the producers managing their programs just thought a Trump victory impossible.  A college education doesn’t amount to much anymore that’s for sure.

Ask yourself a question and think about it, who was the media, especially the corporate media, really scared off?

Guess?

Based on coverage and on air attitude alone, in descending order, Jill Stein firstly, then Gary Johnson and finally Bernie Sanders.

There is no doubt in my mind that the media played a major role in getting Trump elected whether they as individuals, recognize that fact or not.  That’s only part of the equation though because I had the hardest time figuring out why anybody would vote for him, much less Hillary Clinton, even though I was certain he would win.  This state of mental information and prespective was a bit mind bending but I want to try and write my way through it.

20% of voters poled stated that they felt voting for Donald Trump would by like throwing a Molotov cocktail into the government (Storm Clouds Gathering/You Tube).  I can only think of one word to describe this emotional state and that is rage. There was an element of Donald Trump’s rhetoric, especially during the run up to the convention, that seemed to be pandering to certain elements of the far right.  If you have an opportunity check out his comments about the nature and type of people that illegally immigrate from the south and compare it to the rhetoric used by certain far right groups, the Neo Nazi’s. Aryan’s.  This is definitely race language with in that stance it just doesn’t sound like the race language from the 50s, 60s or even the 80s.  Immigrants, especially illegal immigrants are an easy target, most people won’t recognize the language as loaded and racist.  Most people don’t understand Northern Speak.  The Language of Political incorrectness had layers to it and different people hear different things  This stance along with Trump’s physical antics appeared to fall with in the lines of a certain style of liberty/nationalist political rhetoric if you are a member of some of the less savory elements from the hyper far right.  That still doesn’t account for the bulk of the people who voted for him.  Outside of Immigration where the candidate in question had fairly consist views even if his understanding of the cost and methods for execution appeared sketchy at times, he took every imaginable position.  It seemed that he spoke plainly and specifically to each audience and said basically, what he thought they wanted to hear.  NERD WRITER on You tube did an excellent dissection of the level of education or reading level exhibited by Trump through the text of his speeches which, it seems, was at about a fourth grade level.  It is a mistake to think that Donald Trump is some kind of a moron.  He is a promoter, promoting real estate projects, his brand or himself, that is how he makes his living.  Another word for promoter is Salesman.  A good sales man always knows his audience and in this case his audience lacked a college education.  KISS, a phrase I heard through out my youth when trying to communicate an idea, especially in high school.  Keep It Simple Stupid so that every one can understand it.  These supporters come from what we use to call in the old days the White Working class, largely lower working class.  The 2010 Census revealed that for the first time in U.S history more people lived in Urban areas than in Rural.  51% of the population are now living in the top twenty metropolitan areas.

The neo liberal evolution left a surprisingly large number of people behind, ruined many and left the rest without hope and for three or four decades now that there is a building resentment or resignation in the population.  But even this does account for his victory.  I got the impression that Trump didn’t expect to win, he seemed surprised to me.  In the end I think people voted for him, for the most part, not because they necessarily agreed with any particular part of his rhetoric but simply because he wasn’t a politician.  He was rich too, we American’s worship rich folks, I’m sure that didn’t hurt him either.

Donald Trump is like an empty glass, any given individual sees what they want in him.  If they want to see job creation and a better life then that is what they see.  If what they want to see comes from fear then it is fascism, racism, sexism, violent repressive state violence and oppression then that is what they see.  Trump is a spokesperson, a mouth piece, a show man and a distraction, what Lionel Nation on You Tube would call a rodeo clown except nobody is calling Trump that.  Instead they label him Crazy, stupid, incapable, narcissistic authoritarian or on the other hand a genius, a nationalist, anti globalist which, some , either positive of negative, maybe true.

Between Secretary Clinton and Donald Trump there wasn’t much of a choice.  60% of voters didn’t like either candidate (Redacted Tonight/You Tube)).  The election was a real shit storm, it was extremely divisive.  In my experience it isn’t unusual for a sizable portion of the population to dislike or hate the person of the president.  I became aware of this when I listened to people older than me talking about the Kennedy Assassination.  In their experience as many people cheered as those that cried.  So the idea that the population being split is some how novel is incorrect.  From where I sit it appears that both the administration and the corporate/citizen media are trying to agitate this situation.

“People are Dangerous” Noam Chomsky

Although this may not be conspiracy it very well could be a case of collusion.  A large portion of the population fighting among themselves, especially in large easily identified groups suits anyone looking to profit.  Fear Sells.  Fear confuses.  In these states obfuscation is simple to accomplish.  Don’t underestimate this, the crack down will come only if these groups interfere with the daily activities of large businesses.  This doesn’t change the fact that the administration is standing on shaky ground.  If Trump cannot deliver on key promises to his supporters, especially the economic ones, he’s got a problem.  He managed to pull off the immigrant ban and even if this next one is contested he’ll just try again.  Taking an anti illegal immigrant stance, or anti legal immigrant stance for that matter is like shooting fish in a bucket.  It works here, it works in Europe and pretty much everywhere else.  The concept is easy, whether it is simple like different is bad or slightly more complex like, if the economy doesn’t improve their will be no work for the new grown incoming people and of course there is fear of too mach competition or favoritism, fear never loses when it comes to influencing the population.  At this point I am indifferent about the illegal/refugee/new immigrant issue an largely see it as a Red Herring.  I felt at the time that if anyone really wanted to stop illegals they would simply prosecute the businesses that employ them, I mean this in the criminal sense.  Start throwing the individuals at the top these businesses in prison and watch the illegal flow cease.

I know that this will never happen.

It also appears that The Affordable Healthcare act isn’t being repealed at all, instead they are just amending the legislation (readthebill.gop).  So they are taking an insurance subsidy wrapped in a healthcare plan and removing the healthcare plan, it seems.  I could simply be incapable of comprehending the bill and they way it is written makes understanding it clearly difficult even though it is only 28 pages long.  It appears that this could affect a large portion of people, especially the 55 to 64 demographic, negatively, but I am prepared to wait and see.  There is a real anti-war attitude developing so we shall see if Trump’s Administration can reduce our exposure in foreign lands though we already have more boots on the ground in Syria.  The question is the cause, is it something that was already underway under The Obama Administration or was it something the Trump administration decided to do?  If it appears that Donald Trump is more of the same, just another deceitful politician who lacks the will or the intention to follow through on key issues, the population that voted for him will eventually begin to loose faith, example, pocket book issues/jobs/foreign policy/healthcare, things could get a bit shaky.  I don’t know how long his supporters will be able to keep the faith but the screaming mass of anti Trump people definitely create a feeling of conflict, the in sense of War, psychologically, as long as that atmosphere holds it will energize the Trump supporters to redouble their efforts.

If the economy should take a hard downward turn or some other catalyst occur, this tense situation has the potential for a serious spat of civil unrest/violence.  The Democrats need to rethink their platform, they need issues to support that appeal to a broader spectrum of people positively if they wish to have any opportunity to mount a serious challenge to the republican’s control of Congress.  I, personally, wouldn’t expect any serious introspection or refocusing of strategy from the Democrats until 2020 at the very earliest.

We have been suckered into a game of stick the prick and the question is who’s the prick?  We shall see because interest rates, the prime lending rate specifically, are going to start to rise.  The Trump Candidacy is the perfect environment for this move.  I would not expect the first increase to be any more that 25 points, (.25%) probably less.  With his rhetoric and his administrative style (Donald Trump) and the intense volatile division in the population some one other than the Federal Reserve or even the banking system will be blamed if the economy should sputter.  I don’t think an increase in interest rates alone will seriously harm what’s left of the economy, something else significant and unexpected has to happen about the same time.

That’s when things will get interesting.

Unlike so many others I still have faith in regular people.  A series of events, another dishonest/corrupt politician, a declining economy can either produce catastrophe or a unified movement.

Maybe we all get lucky and nothing will happen at all, maybe things will even improve, what do you think the odds of that are?

Understanding Power Part II

I tend to think of Part I as Simple power while Part II deals more with complex power.

Before I continue I wold once again like to state that I believe that every human being has the right to defend themselves.  It should be understood that some believe that a good offense is the best defense but the moment that one makes the argument for any form of preemption in the name of self defense that one should always suspect that it is, in reality, an argument for aggression.

Complex power, for the sake of thus discussion is dependent on developed societies in order to exist.  Developed societies is a polite way of saying civilized.  Civilized societies have institutionalized structures, the peculiarity of division of labor and more often than not hierarchical leadership structures.  These concepts are all part of the discipline of sociology a part of academia I sort of backed my way into in an informal sense.  The first limitation I wish to place on this form of moderate power is that it is an aspect of social systems whose reach could be the size of a county, a township, a municipality,. a state or providence, a medium sized corporation, a small religious tradition or even a small country.  The key in understanding scale is firstly realizing that these entities have little or no ability to project power much beyond the region in which they dwell.  This inability to project power and the small scale of this tier of power allows the people who both compose the organs of the system or systems as well as the individuals that cohabit with the system to know each other or at least have the possibility of knowing each other.

Television, mass media and yes, even the internet create the illusion of knowing another person but that is not the same, for the sake of this discussion, of knowing a person in the sense of sharing any given three dimensional space.  The holders of power and the rest of the population can actual be on good speaking terms, go to each others birthday parties, visit each other when they are sick and attend functions both social, educational or managerial.  This is an effort to get across the scale of these intermediate systems.  Let it be understood that just because you can or the possibility exists to share 3D space with a person doesn’t mean that you do, only the possibility must exist in a probable and realistic manner for it to qualify.

Also in the realm of intermediate power there is at least the illusion of accountability for those who hold said power’s actions.  What this means is that if a person who holds a position of power commits a crime in the codified sense then there are criminal consequences or at the very least the illusion of consequences.  This means a trial and the possibility of prison just like those of us who live around, under or work with in said system.  What is important here is that the illusion of consequences be realistic so that it could be said that on occasion some one has to pay the piper as it were.

So what are the prerequisites to hold said power?

Power can be obtained several ways,  it could be a question of status of family, by election of your peers,by accreditation and possible do to personality and appearance (Charisma).

Here are a few quick illustrations.

Family Status is usually connected to both wealth and influence.  Those two things, wealth an d influence, regardless of the nation state or region you might examine, seem universal.  The was a gentleman, who had recently passed beyond the veil, that I had become familiar with through the local historical society.  His family was long established in my community and still held some considerable capital though not as much as they had in the past.  He worked as a middle school  principal.  He was always being quoted in the paper as though his thoughts on our little community had any real relevance and he traveled to Washington D.C.  once a month for some sort of a panel at the capital.  This was mentioned as an aside and I didn’t pry.  There is no doubt that he had much experience that would have been valuable to any inquiry specifically round the topic of education.  I am also certain that most people who have been seriously involved in education for any reasonable length of time would also have ideas and experiences that would be equally valuable.  I was left wondering why the preference?

My grandfather was also a school teacher and a high school coach, basket ball, Football and base ball.  His power came from accreditation as he was the first person in the state of Ohio to earn a masters degree in education.  He also had a gift for turning some coin in the world of investing so he was something of a self made man.  He too held a great deal of sway in my small city.  He could get people, especially minors out of jail on his word alone.  He had the ear of judges, lawyers, doctors, members of law enforcement, school teachers and even people in the government at the state level.  This power was able to change someone in my locality circumstances when it came to their status with the various systems that govern the world in which I lived.  He also held elected office in my small city.

And we must not forget Doctors, They have power too. They have the power to not take you as a patient.  If you should pass from inability to receive medical care they will not be held liable in any way though they may be held liable in the case of malpractice thus the illusion of consequences.  People will talk about health care reform (Health Care affordability and Portability Act) as though it has revolutionized access to medical services.  Down here where I live and most of my friends live the system has some serious kinks to be worked out.  People are having a harder time finding the kind and quality of care that they could before the Acts passage.  I have no idea what it is like in the big cities, I can only speak of the few cases of which I am aware.  This aside, I know of three cases where a Doctor decided they weren’t going to see a patient any more.  They did not state a reason why and continued to practice in the local community.  My point of view on this may seem a bit harsh and in all honestly I don’t care whether doctors only treat people that can afford their services and the rest be damned.  I am simply using it as an illustration of power.  Meta and I have debated whether or not the Hippocratic oath is still taken when doctors finish their education.  She feels that it is not, I feel that it is but it is nothing more than smoke and it been like that for a long time.

Then there is all that chatter over law enforcement with in the realm of police brutality.  I am mixed on this but for the sake of this conversation, if a person, due to the position they hold, can cripple or kill another human being under circumstances other  than self defense then what we are seeing is an example of power.  There are occasions when charges are brought against police officers for  improper use of force which creates the realistic illusion of accountability.

I’m sure that you can come with examples better than mine.  In any case, for what ever it was worth, i hope this was worth the time you spent reading it.

Understanding Power Part I

Before I Begin I want to say that I believe that every human being has the right to self defense.  Self Defense, in my view, does not include preemption.  You or I do not have the right to attack some one or aggressively defend ourselves against the notion of a potential threat.  This aggressive form of self defense also know as preemption isn’t really self defense.  Its aggression, its an attack, we would be going on the offensive.  We can’t just run around attacking people because we don’t like the way they look, that they make us nervous, have different beliefs or look at us funny.

None the Less I support an individual or a populations right to defend themselves by any means once they are under attack, once the lead starts flying as it were.

This is about understanding power and this first installment is about simple power.  I began this post with the statement that I believe in a person’s right to self defense because to a considerable extent simple power deals with the second amendment.  I am 51 years of age and the debate around the second amendment, gun control, has been going on as long as I can remember.  People older than me yet remember this debate as a sort of a back ground noise of their life.  First I’d like to admit that I support the second amendment.  This of course has caused me some concern as I have listened to the last round of debate on the issue of gun control.  It seems to me that the bulk of the people supporting the amendment and resisting any form of gun control make all gun control advocates look like lunatics.  There has been this phrase I have been hearing, now it may have been said in the past and often but this is the first time that I have heard it, and that phrase is “Gun Culture.”

What the Fuck does “Gun Culture” mean?  When I hear the term used, whether the speaker is a citizen of our fair country or a foreign devil, it sounds like some kind of a slam, an insult.  I really had to think on the term for a while to try and get a handle on it.  The internet as a tool for enlightenment was useless in this endeavor and there was no hard copy dictionary definition.  It was frustrating and annoying, all those grinning jar headed, glassy eyed, slack jawed idiots grinning and muttering the word “gun culture” left me with the same putrid feeling as some other pudding for brains, soft bottomed, over privileged turd using the term “White Culture.”

What were these phrases?  Where they some kind of a code, an inside joke, or the result of a group of demographers with a few carefully selected focus groups and their careful search for a phrase that would have some desired effect even though it didn’t actually mean anything?  The thing was, though it kept nagging at me something terrible, that the phrase “Gun Culture” does mean something.  We need to come to grips with the fact that if the citizenry of the United States did not possess military grade firearms in the distant past then our country would, in all likelihood, bear little resemblance to what it is today.  The destruction of the Native population, Genocide if you will, would have been impossible with out an armed citizenry.  The institution of Slavery, which went a long way to making the U.S. a rich country as only free labor can, also would have been impossible with out an armed citizenry.  I realize that these ideas may make people uncomfortable or uneasy but to say otherwise would be grossly unfair and dishonest.

The U.S. expansion into South and Central America after the Spanish American war, our participation in WW I and WW II would have been far less spectacular without a populous that was familiar with the use of fire arms.  Just imagine how quickly forces could be mobilized and fielded when the population already know how to use a gun then when they have to be trained from scratch.  Then of course there is F.D.R and the great depression.  Doctor Richard Wolf has a very interesting interpretation of Roosevelt’s New Deal policies and why they occurred.  It seems that the depression had brought our fair nation to the brink of civil war.  Back then not only where we armed we were also organized.  That’s a damn scary combination.  There were labor unions, political parties, progressives, Communists, Socialists, Antichrists and they shared members, meaning one person could be a member of more than on group union or party.  So when we retell the tale we simple talk about what a Commie FDR was because we most certainly don’t want to encourage the population of our fine nation to organize for a better life.  Maybe these kind of ideas are what is meant by the phrase “Gun Culture.”

In the past these far Left organizations use to scare the shit out of the government but decades of propaganda appealing to individual enrichment and anti union sediment have left our country with out a left wing any longer.  Now the concern is the far right, The Militia, Radical Religious Groups. and Anti Governmental organizations.  When I hear the media discuss these groups, which is rare since I don”t get cable in my home, they fix their side of the argument around the criminal threat and the threat of Terrorism if they are in favor of gun control and if they are against Gun Control them the argument revolves around protecting national sovereignty, defending our boarders (Illegal immigration) and being able to resist the government if it should get to big for its britches.  Then of course there are all the conspiracy theories around the NWO, Agenda 21, Chemtrails, death camps and the coming economic collapse and lets not forget about the Apocalypse although I am not sure what good guns will do a person if the world is ending.  At some point, when the debate turns serious it becomes simply, gun control prevents crime versus an armed citizenry prevents crime.  This is known as framing the argument.  Setting the terms of the debate so that no concept out side of the accepted spectrum of conversation can be discussed.  What is it they don’t really want to talk about?

The more I think about it the more its seems to be true.  What is it that guns represent to most people?  IN the simplest term guns, rifles or pistols represent power.  A firearm is the simplest form of power that any person can grasp.  It is power over your own life, power over other peoples lives, it is your independence and it is your ability to affect your world if you should feel the need.  We in the United States are an Nation of individuals so we lack the large organizations that other developed or Western nations have to affect change in their countries, all we have is fire arms.  It was while I sitting and thinking about this that I realized another very powerful tool we littel people have at our disposal.  That other powerful tool is the ability to say NO.  It is true that first few of us who say NO may pay with our lives.  It is also true that it is hard to say NO, especially to something or someone you care about.   Maybe it is just easier to pop a couple rounds off into a crowd.  Remember that the next time you decide to, or see footage of, somebody walking down the street with an AR 15 over their shoulder to protest for their right to bear arms.  I guess in the end its a lot easier for us to kill each other then it is to negotiate or organize or to simply say NO and stop participating.  Remember this the next time you witness a debate, whether in person or on television, as the discussion devolves into some ridiculous sensationalist piece of political theater that turns your stomach, because it should.

Those jar headed grinning idiots are trying to marginalize the whole of us because what the debate is about is power and taking away yours.  If you can’t own a fire arm legally, a weapon competitive with military hard ware, you can’t work up the courage to say NO and you refuse to organize, Well, what are you gonna do?  Where will you find your power?